Elam, you may recall, accused Pattek of serious violations of civil rights laws, claiming that she, as an employee of Georgetown’s admissions office, showed clear bias against white men. Indeed, Elam didn’t even qualify his accusations with an “alleged,” as journalists routinely do when writing about those accused but not convicted of crimes. Here’s what he wrote about her:

Pattek, who clearly has issues with sexual and racial bigotry, decided she would not only trash the applications of white males on sight, she also decided to blog about her activities under what she assumed was anonymous conditions. Writing for a web blog called The Feminist Conservative, Pattek laid out precisely what she was doing in very clear terms. …

Clearly this is a person not only warped by ideology, but who also holds deep seated prejudices that guided her unscrupulous actions. Her targets were selected by sex, race, political beliefs and perhaps even religion. Her identity was traced after she referenced the subject of her master’s thesis at Georgetown in some of her writing, including the “about” page at the Feminist Conservative.

The trouble is that absolutely none of this is true. There’s nothing linking Pattek to the blog, which seems to be a hoax, and numerous things suggesting that she is NOT the author of the blog any more than Paul Elam is.

As Georgetown has made clear, Pattek never worked for the school’s admissions office. She never wrote a Master’s thesis; she graduated from Georgetown in 2012 with a bachelors degree, not a masters (as Elam claims) or a doctorate (as the FeministConservative blogger claimed about herself, if she is even a she). Pattek’s thesis was a Senior thesis required for her minor in Justice and Peace, which a program for undergraduates. The topic(s) of her senior thesis only bear a slight resemblance to the topic(s) of the alleged doctoral thesis of the FeministConservative blogger. Even a quick perusal of the “evidence” posted on A Voice for Men will reveal numerous other discrepancies.

Indeed, the falsity and recklessness of Elam’s charges against Pattek are so patently obvious that even some MRAs have begun to doubt. On the Men’s Rights subreddit, for example, the mods have added “May be fake” to the title of the thread discussing the feministconservative blog controversy.

I’ve been on another forum with a couple other people, and this is absolutely a fake. [Pattek’s] thesis states that she is of Jewish descent and identifies wholly as Jewish, while the blog states that she is Christian and not of Jewish descent.

Pattek seems to be a pretty good person. Someone’s been deleting all traces of her from the GU website, likely another student. Google archives are telling us that she has multiple awards, she helped children in need in Kenya. Her thesis is of pretty good quality, too. The blog is of shit quality without effort to spell things correctly. It’s quite the blatant online defamation campaign, and I haven’t the slightest idea why.

Incidentally, he’s right about the difference in religion, the awards, the work Pattek did in Kenya, the difference in quality between the blog and Pattek’s thesis. He’s wrong about who deleted the information: as we learned yesterday, it was the current director of the Justice and Peace program, in response to harassment from white supremacists.

So where is the upswelling of outrage amongst MRAs at Elam’s false accusations? Where are the calls for him to be charged with crimes as serious as the civil rights violations he has accused Pattek of? Where are the calls for him to turn himself in – or at the very least, to apologize for his misdeeds and step down from his position at A Voice for Men?

I haven’t seen any.

For MRAs, sorry seems to be the hardest word.

You might expect Pierce Harlan of the so-called Community of the Wrongly Accused to have some sympathy for the wrongly accused Pattek. But he’s said nothing on his site (or anywhere else, as far as I know) about Elam’s false and reckless accusations, and Elam is still listed in the Community of the Wrongly Accused sidebar as a “False rape activist,” whatever that is.

Over on the Men’s Rights subreddit, meanwhile, the mods actually deleted a post asking “So, when does the woman you guys falsely accused get an apology?” (You can still find it here, but you can no longer reach it from the Men’s Rights subreddit itself.) The comments, naturally, are full of denial, and many have been deleted, making for a surreal discussion indeed. “I don’t recall having falsely accused anyone of anything,” real-boethius wrote indignantly. “Even AVFM had the story up as “Georgetown University Coverup?” – note the question mark, and they state that the evidence is inconclusive.”

Uh, Did. You. Actually. Read. Elam’s. Post?

Elam, for his part, after adamantly attacking all those who challenged his accusations in any way, may now realize that he’s made a huge mistake. He hasn’t admitted this, of course, but he has awkwardly appended to his post some of the information gathered by Chris Deslone that clearly shows that his accusations are completely bogus. So now we have the strange spectacle of a post that accuses Pattek of various civil rights violations, without even an “allegedly” to qualify the accusations, which ends with links to official statements from Georgetown that undercut everything Elam has said:

All of this is surreal enough, but perhaps the most surreal response to the whole thing comes from the Reno, Nevada MRA known as Scarecrow, a former-but-now-banned Man Boobz commenter, in a comment on Reddit:

Apparently nothing is ever the fault of MRAs ever, including the things they do.

UPDATE: Elam has now retracted his original story naming Pattek as a civil rights violator. Here are the key bits of his retraction:

In hindsight it is apparent that I was too fast on the trigger in establishing a connection between the blogger who claimed to have sabotaged the applications and that of a former student at Georgetown. While there is circumstantial evidence that does connect the two, and many unanswered questions, there is nothing that makes that connection a verifiable certainty.

It was a mistake on my part for which I apologize to the woman in question, and to any readers who felt they were misled. The original article naming her has been updated with a link to this retraction and her name has been redacted from the article. I am also removing all comments to the article and closing them to make sure no references to her are made.

I think this somewhat mealymouthed mea culpa is about as close to an admission of wrongdoing as we’re ever likely to get from Elam on anything.

I also want to make it clear that this retraction does not mean that AVFM is abandoning its investigation into the validity of the claims made about trashing university applications based on sex and race. Additionally, we are not done with concerns about the university itself, whose unusual and somewhat cryptic manner of responding to this story leaves more questions than answers.

Actually, I think Georgetown was fairly direct in responding to most of the questions on its official Twitter account. Elam also brings up his conspiracy theory, saying that

we did not take an interest in it until it became apparent that Georgetown University was moving, without explanation, to remove all references to her from their websites.

In fact, the director of the Justice and Peace program at Georgetown, Mark Lance, provided an explanation of this to my readers yesterday, as I pointed out in this post. But I’ll recap: according to Lance, the past director of the Justice and Peace program took her information down in response to harassment from white supremacists. There’s nothing particularly mysterious about that.

I’m honestly surprised to see Elam admit to being wrong about anything. I suspect — though I have no proof, and this is simply speculation — that he may have spoken to a lawyer — either his own, or someone else’s.

It is true that I’ve seen Elam be a condescending asshole to both male and female commenters. The fact that the dude”s an asshole, generally, doesn’t mean he doesn’t have a particular hate-on for women. See also, chuckeedee.

Dave: I would say that Elam’s recklessness, combined with the vindictiveness he regularly shows towards feminists and many other women, makes Elam as bad a false accuser than the stereotypical women who falsely accuses a man out of spite. Indeed, Elam seems to do almost *everything* out of spite.

I’d say worse. Why? Because the average false (truly false, as opposed to cases of mistaken ID) rape claim is pretty quickly dismissed. If it’s famous it’s dismissed in the public mind with a huge dose of hate for the accuser (e.g. Tawana Brawley) and/or her supporters (look at the rage directed against Marcotte, as compare to the benign negelct Nifong gets. hell people still bring the Brawley case up to attack Al Sharpton).

Elam, however, makes these accusations against people and they are left to fester. Register.her is still up. People are still blathering about how “Georgetown has been acting all suspicious” because they aren’t treating MRAs as if they were Walter Cronkite (look at typhonblue, who thing Georgetown needs to make statements; to the rumors will be laid to rest. Anything else, according to her, shows they have something to hide).

It’s a lynch mob mentality; which he fosters, and then exploits. He is does this shit repeatedly, and with intent.

The two sexes have different sexualities, with different contexts attributed to their experiences, so it is not possible to give this complex topic its due in this forum… or do you believe that male and female sexuality are identical, with equivalent experiences of rape?

blah blah blah, evopsych.

Speaking for myself, I do not classify myself as an MRA because I get entertainment value from watching the idiotic choices that you-go-grrrls make. Now how equalitarian is that?

Chickadee: The two sexes have different sexualities, with different contexts attributed to their experiences

And until recently (about 150 years ago) it was women who were the insatiably sexual half of the human species (in the Western mind). So… the idea that it’s somehow “innate” is codswallop.

Elam has written posts slamming men for their own forms of stupidity.

Often in the form of, “they listened to women”.

He, as do I, see no point in classifying one sex as better or worse than the other.

Bullshit. Remember when he wrote that “Women are the reason the environment is suffering”? I certainly recall him using the word, “mangina”, it’s him saying men he doesn’t like are, “womanly”. Which is a sign of blanket disdain (at the least) of women [you really aren’t very good at this logic/debate stuff, are you? What with consistently making a point only to self-refute it… are you sure you come here for the arguments?)

He, as do I, see no point in classifying one sex as better or worse than the other….

I do not classify myself as an MRA because I get entertainment value from watching the idiotic choices that you-go-grrrls make. Now how equalitarian is that?

Not at all…because you are saying you get amusement from “the idiotic choices” of the, “you-go-girls” types make. On the flip side when an Elam makes a fuck up what you complain about isn’t that he did a fucked up, stupid (even evil) thing, but about how “low” the people who point it out are stooping.

Dishonest, and Venal. Selling your soul, and you didn’t even get Wales for it.

The two sexes have different sexualities, with different contexts attributed to their experiences, so it is not possible to give this complex topic its due in this forum

”

Why not?

You have words and time, and you can link sources. You need nothing else to give the topic its due – words, time and the possibility of linking to sources.

So go on… Give the topic its due.

and in that due, explain how the nominal difference between sexualties translates to one sex “begging to be raped” in prison and another not doing so.
—

Woud you make the same argument for a knife wound, because the endocrine system of male, females and others all differ from each other?

Because our endocrine system is inherently different, with different contexts attributed to their experience, it’s not possible to give the topic its treatment in this forum, so take my word for it, you *are* allowed to stab men with a knife, because their experience of pain is objectively different from the pain women experience! this means it’s okay!
—

I’m being facetious, but so are you. Interesting that you choose to go with “different contexts attributed to their experience”, by the way – contexts being attributed hardly seems to speak of inherent, fixed situations but rather an agreed upon exchange of meaning.

Oh well.

i’m going to go stab someone with a knife now, because the hormonal system means I can. Its just the way it works!

I certainly recall him using the word, “mangina”, it’s him saying men he doesn’t like are, “womanly”. Which is a sign of blanket disdain (at the least) of women

He has also used the term “white knight”. White knights are your quintessential chivalrous git… a blend of machismo and obsequiousness… the original “male chauvinist pig” given to pedestalizing women and opening car doors for them because they’re too disabled to open them themselves. So no, he’s not confined his attacks to “womanish” men at all.

Of course, Elam and pals generally apply the term “white knight” to the sort of man who, you know, thinks that A Voice for Men shouldn’t target random women for hate campaigns based on faulty evidence that Elam hasn’t even read. Elam has deleted the comments to that Georgetown article, but several commenters used that term to blast his critics — who were, incidentally , completely right — and those commenters got upvotes from the AVFM peanut gallery. (Happily, I saved screenshots.)

Using the term “white knight” to essentially mean “a man who doesn’t hate women sufficiently” does not exactly absolve Elam and pals of charges of misogyny.

He has also used the term “white knight”. White knights are your quintessential chivalrous git… a blend of machismo and obsequiousness… the original “male chauvinist pig” given to pedestalizing women and opening car doors for them because they’re too disabled to open them themselves. So no, he’s not confined his attacks to “womanish” men at all.

Even if it were true that his usage of the word “white knight” isn’t misogynistic, it wouldn’t change the fact that he is a misogynist for calling men “manginas.” You don’t have any argument, sorry.

Also,”quintessential,” “machismo,” and “obsequiousness” all in the same line? I hope you know that being a pretentious fuckwad doesn’t make you charming or interesting.

Speaking of “mangina,” I remember my older sister’s ex saying that a lot. And he is an avid Redditor. And he treated my sister like she was his servant, telling her to make him breakfast at 7:30 AM just because he was lazy. And he broke up with her because she made a mistake in ordering fast food for him….

In light of the above evidence, I think he’s an MRA. Now my reason for hating him is even clearer.

So, it may just be me, but I kinda feel like calling chuckeedee “Chickadee” is similar to calling a group of guys “ladies” or “p*ssies” or any other word that means women or is slang for women but is used to belittle a man for his supposed female qualities.

Which is why it’s kind of weird in this particular conversation, but still not appropriate.

That makes sense. I assumed it was supposed to be a bird reference, but it definitely can also be seen as trying to demean him by comparing him to women (because in our f-ed up society, that’s demeaning)

Yeah, I also assumed the bird reference i.e. chickadee = small bird chirping at us. Also, is chuckie saying that men and women view rape, the social problem, differently, or is he saying that men and women view their rapes differently? Because, if the second, then citation fucking needed

Whatever was meant by it, chickadee is a gendered term used by some in place of “chick” or “girl” or “sweetie.” Pecunium’s intentions to one side, I’m just pointing out that the general usage of the word makes it problematic here.

Which doesn’t change that it’s a bit problematic. At this point I don’t recall who was first to use it. I should probably find another nickname for him, as he is one of the special cases who has earned one.

He’s just a sick attention loving pig.. his latest blog, but dont bother trying to comment as he was called out by a few readers for what he is& is screening all the responces but him&his alter ego NEO.
He has a lovely conversation with himself at the end. He is the reason i do support gun controll for the mentally defective though. :/

A hoax is designed to fool people, and that is what this one involving Geogetown and Arianna Pattek did.

Seems to me that the best a person can do if they identify a mistake they made, is to acknowledge the mistake and make corrections to best of their ability.

Why do you pillory Elam, when he did just that?
Nobody is perfect, but the best of us reach to achieve it.
Elam’s unintentional, and corrected, error, is far counterbalanced by the good and intentional work he has done without error.

You chastised him for the mistake, and then you chastised him for correcting the mistake.
Seems like you would chastise him for simply existing, irrespective of what he did.

A hoax is designed to fool people, and that is what this one involving Geogetown and Arianna Pattek did.

Seems to me that the best a person can do if they identify a mistake they made, is to acknowledge the mistake and make corrections to best of their ability.

Why do you pillory Elam, when he did just that?
Nobody is perfect, but the best of us reach to achieve it.
Elam’s unintentional, and corrected, error, is far counterbalanced by the intentional work he has done without error.

You chastised him for the mistake, and then you chastised him for correcting the mistake.
Seems like you would chastise him for simply existing, irrespective of what he did.

Even your hero Paul’s retraction was half-assed, implying there was some “circumstantial evidence” against the totally innocent woman, and implying (again without any evidence) that somehow Georgetown’s actions were suspicious.

So Gary, do you want to disclose what your involvement is with AVfM, since you’re not exactly a neutral bystander?